...
It sucks that physics works out the way it does, but you have to get past this blindingly narrow ideological approach to life. Inaction now is blatant violence towards those who have no say in having their environment turned upside down and destroyed in some ways.
'Action' (not 'inaction') in the way the 'consensus' describes it (however nebulously) is blatant violence against all but the upper 1% or less of the world's population. For probably 25% at least it is effectively a death sentence. It is a genocidal program, or at least a major component there-of.
I believe this is more the underpinning of your belief than rational inspection of the evidence.
It will be a far lesser mistake to switch to renewables then find out we were wrong than it will be to find out we are wrong after even more damage will have been done.
Oil companies have already switched their mining methods to things like fracking because we've used up round one of oil. Even if you are correct about manmade global warming being a fraud, you've basically admitted we do not live in a way approaching sustainable. You did say that renewables = 25% death sentence, right? I would like to hear your views on what we should do as carbon based burn'em up energy will be used up at some point? Or will this just be another inconsistency in your beliefs...
What is the bar for you to admit you were wrong?
If you have not set a bar it is further evidence that your beliefs come from somewhere not so rational.